Re: [PATCH 04/10] seccomp: Migrate to use SYSCALL_WORK flag

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Fri, Nov 13 2020 at 22:29, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>  
> +enum syscall_work_bit {
> +	SYSCALL_WORK_SECCOMP		= 0,

enums start at 0, so why do you need an explicit assignment?

> +};
> +
> +#define _SYSCALL_WORK_SECCOMP BIT(SYSCALL_WORK_SECCOMP)

Do we really have to repeat the nonsense from TIF/_TIF in the naming
here? Can we please name this in a way which makes it obvious what is
what?

Thanks,

        tglx